I feel the need to preface, this thread, indicating it has absolutely nothing to do with Rod Carey..because, it does not, and the Rod Carey destraction is just a way not to deal with the reality and gravity of the football situation.


So with this off my chest I sincerely pose two question to "That Guy" ...By that guy I am alluding to the people on this board who was able to rid themselves of their biggest enemies ( former starting qb / former coach". Those guys were not bashful to say, let's see what happens, they guaranteed video game numbers..so I guess, I wonder where that was coming from?

Next question, would be in humble estimate, how, and why did this profilic offense never evolve. Now, you had no curve balls, as you know what was lost, and gained revolving graduation, and returning starters. We have had no significant injuries.


To reinterate, this is not about Rod Carey..really curious to know where, and why the initial buzz came from, and how and where it went wrong???

(11-05-2019 10:16 PM)Jb 94 Wrote:  I feel the need to preface, this thread, indicating it has absolutely nothing to do with Rod Carey..because, it does not, and the Rod Carey destraction is just a way not to deal with the reality and gravity of the football situation.


So with this off my chest I sincerely pose two question to "That Guy" ...By that guy I am alluding to the people on this board who was able to rid themselves of their biggest enemies ( former starting qb / former coach". Those guys were not bashful to say, let's see what happens, they guaranteed video game numbers..so I guess, I wonder where that was coming from?

Next question, would be in humble estimate, how, and why did this profilic offense never evolve. Now, you had no curve balls, as you know what was lost, and gained revolving graduation, and returning starters. We have had no significant injuries.


To reinterate, this is not about Rod Carey..really curious to know where, and why the initial buzz came from, and how and where it went wrong???

Serious question. Are you sober? Are these sentences or brain spasms?

No significant injuries??? Half the defense is out bud lol

(11-05-2019 10:23 PM)HuskieDave Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 10:16 PM)Jb 94 Wrote:  I feel the need to preface, this thread, indicating it has absolutely nothing to do with Rod Carey..because, it does not, and the Rod Carey destraction is just a way not to deal with the reality and gravity of the football situation.


So with this off my chest I sincerely pose two question to "That Guy" ...By that guy I am alluding to the people on this board who was able to rid themselves of their biggest enemies ( former starting qb / former coach". Those guys were not bashful to say, let's see what happens, they guaranteed video game numbers..so I guess, I wonder where that was coming from?

Next question, would be in humble estimate, how, and why did this profilic offense never evolve. Now, you had no curve balls, as you know what was lost, and gained revolving graduation, and returning starters. We have had no significant injuries.


To reinterate, this is not about Rod Carey..really curious to know where, and why the initial buzz came from, and how and where it went wrong???

Serious question. Are you sober? Are these sentences or brain spasms?

Yes Jb, please SOBER up, in this state of mind you could do some really dumb things, like fall over while trying to walk in a straight line, or fake punting from your own 10 yard line in a bowl game. Get some rest please

No significant injuries!?

You lost me at No Significant Injuries.

Quality of JB's writing aside, I think he asks a legit question: Where is the fast-paced, high-scoring offense we were promised? More on that in a second. With regard to the injuries comment, I think JB is saying we haven't had any significant injuries on offense. Other than Bowers' concussion which cost him 1 1/2 games (and we won the game he missed), the RBs, TEs, and receivers have all been healthy (Richie was just stupid and it cost him time). The OL has been nicked up, but they're pretty young, green, and in learning mode, so it's hard to blame their uneven performance on injuries. So why hasn't the offense clicked with the new OC? Probably an awful lot to that, much of which has been discussed on this board, but I can offer a little intel collected on a recent biz trip to Sioux Falls, SD, for what it's worth. One of the guys at the meeting is a huge SDSU Jack Rabbits fan--was following their game on his phone during the meeting. He and I got to talking and I mentioned that I'm an NIU fan and that Eidsness is now our OC. He perked up, said Eidsness was great, and asked what I thought of him. I said it's kind of early to tell, but we aren't scoring many points or moving the ball very efficiently. He asked about our QBs, and I told him we have a runner who can't throw and a pro-style QB who throws well but can't run. He laughed and said Eidsness's scheme is predicated on a dual threat QB and that could be a big part of the problem. He said give him time--he was awesome for SDSU and they were sorry to see him go. Like I said, for what that's worth. But if it is indeed the case, we have one more year each of Childers and Bowers, who if we could blend them into one QB it seems we'd be in pretty good shape. I'd imagine we'll see a lot of effort to recruit a legit dual threat guy or two for next season and beyond if Eidsness stays.

(11-06-2019 09:45 AM)HW58 Wrote:  Quality of JB's writing aside, I think he asks a legit question: Where is the fast-paced, high-scoring offense we were promised? More on that in a second. With regard to the injuries comment, I think JB is saying we haven't had any significant injuries on offense. Other than Bowers' concussion which cost him 1 1/2 games (and we won the game he missed), the RBs, TEs, and receivers have all been healthy (Richie was just stupid and it cost him time). The OL has been nicked up, but they're pretty young, green, and in learning mode, so it's hard to blame their uneven performance on injuries. So why hasn't the offense clicked with the new OC? Probably an awful lot to that, much of which has been discussed on this board, but I can offer a little intel collected on a recent biz trip to Sioux Falls, SD, for what it's worth. One of the guys at the meeting is a huge SDSU Jack Rabbits fan--was following their game on his phone during the meeting. He and I got to talking and I mentioned that I'm an NIU fan and that Eidsness is now our OC. He perked up, said Eidsness was great, and asked what I thought of him. I said it's kind of early to tell, but we aren't scoring many points or moving the ball very efficiently. He asked about our QBs, and I told him we have a runner who can't throw and a pro-style QB who throws well but can't run. He laughed and said Eidsness's scheme is predicated on a dual threat QB and that could be a big part of the problem. He said give him time--he was awesome for SDSU and they were sorry to see him go. Like I said, for what that's worth. But if it is indeed the case, we have one more year each of Childers and Bowers, who if we could blend them into one QB it seems we'd be in pretty good shape. I'd imagine we'll see a lot of effort to recruit a legit dual threat guy or two for next season and beyond if Eidsness stays.

Very interesting - I agree, the OP question referred to offense as not having many injuries (until this last game). If Eidsness is used to a dual option QB it's interesting that we brought in anything but that in Bowers. With Eidsness there, are we going to switch back to dual option QBs? Will we be able to recruit a good one?

We simply do not have the tools for the high octane offense we were promised. The O line is built to operate the pistol option offense of quick passes and QB/HB runs we were so accustomed to with Coach U, and thus Bowers doesn't have the time he needs to make a play back there. Our WRs are more shifty screen and short pass kind of guys, they aren't the type that gets separation in the middle and deeper halves of the field.

Our problems on O, mostly revolve around the offensive line right now. Once we get the pass protection we need and run blocking, we should be fine down the road. But these aren't things that are going to come this season.

The problem with the offense I have is progress. How in week 2 do you have 300 yards of VS the #3 defense in the country and in week 9 you have 250 yds vs CMU? My guess is in week 2 they dumbed done the offense. Simplified it as to not get Bowers killed and hence the team was able to execute a little. Also teams had no game film in the O yet. The offense is worse with the same players. The talent hasn’t changed on O but the results are worse. Coaching problem there.

(11-06-2019 10:57 AM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  We simply do not have the tools for the high octane offense we were promised. The O line is built to operate the pistol option offense of quick passes and QB/HB runs we were so accustomed to with Coach U, and thus Bowers doesn't have the time he needs to make a play back there. Our WRs are more shifty screen and short pass kind of guys, they aren't the type that gets separation in the middle and deeper halves of the field.

Our problems on O, mostly revolve around the offensive line right now. Once we get the pass protection we need and run blocking, we should be fine down the road. But these aren't things that are going to come this season.

I wish more people would honestly assess the situation like you did.

(11-06-2019 11:26 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  The problem with the offense I have is progress. How in week 2 do you have 300 yards of VS the #3 defense in the country and in week 9 you have 250 yds vs CMU? My guess is in week 2 they dumbed done the offense. Simplified it as to not get Bowers killed and hence the team was able to execute a little. Also teams had no game film in the O yet. The offense is worse with the same players. The talent hasn’t changed on O but the results are worse. Coaching problem there.

+1

(11-06-2019 01:12 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 10:57 AM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  We simply do not have the tools for the high octane offense we were promised. The O line is built to operate the pistol option offense of quick passes and QB/HB runs we were so accustomed to with Coach U, and thus Bowers doesn't have the time he needs to make a play back there. Our WRs are more shifty screen and short pass kind of guys, they aren't the type that gets separation in the middle and deeper halves of the field.

Our problems on O, mostly revolve around the offensive line right now. Once we get the pass protection we need and run blocking, we should be fine down the road. But these aren't things that are going to come this season.

I wish more people would honestly assess the situation like you did.

MD. Now that Carey is gone, I find myself often agreeing with you. For you so love NIU football, that you just want it to be the best it can be.

I'll disagree with your recent assessments that the cupboard is bare. We don't have the right ingredients in the cupboard. Trying to make lemonade out of flour and augar., Isn't working. Let Ham make a few trips to the grocery store.

Our run game is bad, our WR's can't catch passes, and our QB is running for dear life an awful lot. I don't see how we can have a high-scoring offense until we either learn how to run the ball effectively again or find receivers who can catch. If we had legitimate receivers we could just let Bowers sling the ball all day ala Mike Leach style.

If Bowers is playing should we just completely abandon the run game and go that route? After 9 games we still can't run the ball effectively. Right now, when we hand the ball off to our RBs i have zero expectation of them making a big play. We seem to often get 3 yards or less on our carries and when we need them to get a first down they can't.

(11-06-2019 02:14 PM)epasnoopy Wrote:  Our run game is bad, our WR's can't catch passes, and our QB is running for dear life an awful lot. I don't see how we can have a high-scoring offense until we either learn how to run the ball effectively again or find receivers who can catch. If we had legitimate receivers we could just let Bowers sling the ball all day ala Mike Leach style.

If Bowers is playing should we just completely abandon the run game and go that route? After 9 games we still can't run the ball effectively. Right now, when we hand the ball off to our RBs i have zero expectation of them making a big play. We seem to often get 3 yards or less on our carries and when we need them to get a first down they can't.

Yep. Tired of seeing them run straight into the line and getting stuffed. By now, everyone should realize that the O-line ain't opening up holes.

(11-06-2019 01:53 PM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 01:12 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 10:57 AM)HawaiiToNIU Wrote:  We simply do not have the tools for the high octane offense we were promised. The O line is built to operate the pistol option offense of quick passes and QB/HB runs we were so accustomed to with Coach U, and thus Bowers doesn't have the time he needs to make a play back there. Our WRs are more shifty screen and short pass kind of guys, they aren't the type that gets separation in the middle and deeper halves of the field.

Our problems on O, mostly revolve around the offensive line right now. Once we get the pass protection we need and run blocking, we should be fine down the road. But these aren't things that are going to come this season.

I wish more people would honestly assess the situation like you did.

MD. Now that Carey is gone, I find myself often agreeing with you. For you so love NIU football, that you just want it to be the best it can be.

I'll disagree with your recent assessments that the cupboard is bare. We don't have the right ingredients in the cupboard. Trying to make lemonade out of flour and augar., Isn't working. Let Ham make a few trips to the grocery store.

I also don't agree the cupboard was bare, but I think not properly stocked is appropriate. My example is the LBs. We started off with a top 25 LB unit. However, we are now playing Cole and 2 walk-ons and at times Terry as a LB. If there are 2 scholarship players for each position that is 44 scholarships of the 85 total. Of course, you need more for say RB, QB and WR, but still it seems we did not have the proper number of scholarship LBs. Maybe they just were not available or whatever, but it seems to me we are in a bad situation because the LB position cupboard was not properly stocked.

We still need LBs for next year. The incoming will not be physically ready, and we are short on #s now. A transfer here helps big time.

I like the incoming QB, he has nice over the top motion. Hoping we can hang on to him. Have no idea what we have with the current Fr QB from Detroit / St Aquanis.

PJ's first year record (2013)at WMU was 1-11
His 2016 record was 13-1

Will Thomas Hammock be able to do the same? Don't know but he deserves the opportunity

Yup...decided to be less verbose this evening